Political Interference and the Challenges Facing the US

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Political Interference and the Challenges Facing the US THE YALE LAW JOURNAL FORUM JANUARY 15, 2021 Treat Every Defendant Equally and Fairly: Political Interference and the Challenges Facing the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices as the Justice Department Turns 150 Years Old Joyce White Vance abstract. The US Attorneys’ Offices are the flagships of the federal government’s law-en- forcement work. But as the Department of Justice (DOJ) approaches its 150th anniversary, there are deep concerns for their future. The four years of the Trump Administration have shaken public confidence in DOJ, and during his tenure, Attorney General William Barr all too ofen took on the role of the President’s lawyer rather than upholding the integrity and credibility of line prosecutors to work free from political interference. This Essay, written in the weeks leading up to the 2020 presidential election,1 argues that, in a new administration, there must be a hardcore realignment of cultural values inside of the Justice Department that supports its independence and permits line prosecutors to effectively resist and reject political interference in criminal matters. The past four years have revealed frailty in the Department that requires more than the new laws and new poli- cies that will be designed to shore up some of the weaknesses that have been revealed. Ultimately, even with those new laws and policies, there must be a culture restoration that guarantees they will be implemented effectively so that the independence of prosecutions from political influence, which is critical to our criminal-justice system, is firmly in place. introduction The moment when Aaron Zelinsky, an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) in the District of Maryland, refused to silently stand by while Attorney 1. This Essay was completed well ahead of the election and before Attorney General William Barr’s departure from office. Although no substantive updates have been made since comple- tion, there was minor updating to reflect post-election events like the pardons of Paul Mana- fort and Roger Stone, which only further strengthen the argument made here. 516 treat every defendant equally and fairly General William Barr attempted to subvert justice for President Trump’s long- time friend Roger Stone was a moment of pride for federal prosecutors across the country. Zelinsky held the line against political interference in federal pros- ecutions. He did it possibly at great expense, at least in the short term, to his career. But Zelinsky’s choice was clear. He testified as a whistleblower before Congress and explained, in his view, that the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, where the Stone case was being prosecuted,2 succumbed to political pressure. He testified that Stone “was being treated differently from any other defendant because of his relationship to the President.”3 This subversion of the Department of Justice (DOJ) would have been shock- ing in any other administration, but by February of 2020, it was almost predict- able. Roger Stone, longtime friend and political advisor4 of President Trump, was indicted in January 2019 by Special Counsel Robert Mueller on one count of obstruction of justice, five counts of false statements, and one count of witness tampering.5 Stone denied the charges and pleaded not guilty. On November 15, 2019, a jury in the District of Columbia convicted Stone on all charges.6 Stone became the sixth Trump aide or adviser convicted by members of the Mueller team.7 Federal prosecutors filed their sentencing recommendation on February 10, 2020. Consistent with federal sentencing guidelines, they suggested a sentence of 87-108 months.8 Shortly afer they made that recommendation, President Trump tweeted that the recommendation was an impermissible “miscarriage of justice.”9 The following day, the Government filed a “supplemental and 2. Indictment, United States v. Stone, 394 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2019) (No. 1:19-cr-00018). 3. Oversight of the Department of Justice: Political Interference and Threats to Prosecutorial Independ- ence: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 116th Cong. 2 (2020) [hereinafer Zelinsky Hearing] (statement of Assistant United States Attorney Aaron Zelinsky), https://judiciary .house.gov/uploadedfiles/zelinsky_opening_statement_hjc.pdf [https://perma.cc/ABM9 -8DZV]. 4. See Olivia Paschal & Madeleine Carlisle, A Brief History of Roger Stone, ATLANTIC (Nov. 15, 2019), https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/11/roger-stones-long-history-in -trump-world/581293 [https://perma.cc/K38A-UWYY]. 5. Indictment at 21-23, United States v. Stone, F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2019) (No. 1:19-cr-00018). 6. Ashraf Khalil & Michael Balsamo, Roger Stone Guilty of Witness Tampering, Lying to Congress, ASSOCIATED PRESS (Nov. 15, 2019), https://apnews.com/ad355d2c983e4a7c85bc17e86d8c563f [https://perma.cc/F2BU-DWHU]. 7. Id. 8. Hadley Baker, Federal Prosecutors Recommend Sentencing Roger Stone to Seven to Nine Years, LAWFARE (Feb. 11, 2020 12:17 PM), https://www.lawfareblog.com/federal-prosecutors -recommend-sentencing-roger-stone-seven-nine-years [https://perma.cc/8YEQ-F8GT]. 9. Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), TWITTER (Feb. 11, 2020, 1:48 AM), https://twitter .com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227122206783811585 [https://perma.cc/V6BB-96QJ]. 517 the yale law journal forum January 15, 2021 amended” sentencing motion, which maintained that the previously recom- mended sentence, signed off on by the same U.S. Attorney who signed the sup- plemental pleading, could be considered “excessive and unwarranted.”10 The prosecution confirmed it was still requesting a custodial sentence but lef its length to the discretion of the court.11 Barr denied allegations that the Justice Department’s change of heart was a response to a presidential command,12 but he seemed to be the only one who believed that. The President himself tweeted his thanks to Barr for the change: “Congratulations to Attorney General Bill Barr for taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought.”13 This spectacle led four senior prosecutors assigned to the Stone case to with- draw from it, one of whom resigned from the Department entirely.14 They did what every federal prosecutor knows they must do in the face of political meddling in a case—even if that meddling seemingly comes at the be- hest of the President. Zelinsky protested when the team’s recommendation was bypassed, withdrew from the case, and finally resigned from his temporary spe- cial posting in the District of Columbia.15 There is no question that he did the right thing.16 10. Hadley Baker, Prosecutors Amend Roger Stone Sentencing Recommendation, LAWFARE (Feb. 11, 2020), https://www.lawfareblog.com/prosecutors-amend-roger-stone-sentencing -recommendation [https://perma.cc/MT84-97GE]. 11. Id. 12. Michael Balsamo, AG Barr’s Remarks Come Afer Change over Stone Sentencing, COLUMBIAN (Feb. 13, 2020, 8:41 PM), https://www.columbian.com/news/2020/feb/13/ag-barrs-remarks -come-afer-change-over-stone-sentencing [https://perma.cc/Z4YQ-KAU7]. 13. Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), TWITTER (Feb. 12, 2020, 6:53 AM), https://twitter .com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227561237782855680 [https://perma.cc/WV64-634A]. 14. Sarah N. Lynch, Prosecutors Quit as Justice Department Seeks Shorter Sentence for Trump Ally, REUTERS (Feb. 11, 2020), https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-stone /prosecutors-quit-as-justice-department-seeks-shorter-sentence-for-trump-ally-idUSKBN2 052E5 [https://perma.cc/J8P8-782A]. 15. See Andrew Prokop, Prosecutors Resign from Roger Stone’s Case Afer DOJ Interference in Sentenc- ing, VOX (Feb. 11, 2020, 6:15 PM EST), https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/21133622 /roger-stone-prosecutor-aaron-zelinsky-resigns [https://perma.cc/R5XH-8BLK]. 16. If anything, President Trump’s commutation of Stone’s sentence just days before he was re- quired to report to begin service of his prison sentence confirms that Zelinsky and his col- leagues properly assessed that there was political influence at work here. For a discussion of President Trump’s commutation, see Peter Baker, Maggie Haberman & Sharon LaFraniere, Trump Commutes Sentence of Roger Stone in Case He Long Denounced, N.Y. TIMES (July 10, 2020), https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/10/us/politics/trump-roger-stone-clemency .html [https://perma.cc/4ZQ8-QYDA]. 518 treat every defendant equally and fairly These events set off a firestorm and the truth came to light. The Attorney General was forced to defend his conduct and, in the process, exposed more of the truth. Sunlight, as Justice Brandeis opined, is the best disinfectant.17 The Justice Department is going through a challenging time as it passes its 150-year anniversary.18 Zelinsky testified that he had never seen political inter- ference brought to bear on a prosecution before the Stone case.19 In fact, the tradition, policies, and culture of the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices are specifically de- signed to prevent against that. Nonetheless, there was a disturbing tendency in Barr’s Justice Department for the appearance of improper political influence, and perhaps the actuality of it, to taint prosecutions, resulting in diminished public confidence in the institution. It would be nice to write a paean to the Justice Department on the auspicious occasion of its anniversary. It would be comforting to write that U.S. Attorneys’ Offices across the country will emerge from the maelstrom of the Trump presi- dency unscathed. But it is no longer possible to say so with absolute certainty. We are at a critical point where the future hangs in the balance. Assessing the damage to the institution while in the moment is a difficult task, and this challenge is compounded by the reality that more misconduct seems to take place or come to light with each passing week. From the time I started work on this Essay until the final edits were submitted, Barr seemed to be engaged in a solid effort to undermine the Department’s reputation.
Recommended publications
  • Presidential Appointments Primer
    2021 NALEO Presidential Appointments Primer 2021 NALEO | PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS PRIMER America’s Latinos are strongly committed to public service at all levels of government, and possess a wealth of knowledge and skills to contribute as elected and appointed officials. The number of Latinos in our nation’s civic leadership has been steadily increasing as Latinos successfully pursue top positions in the public and private sectors. Throughout their tenure, and particularly during times of transition following elections, Presidential administrations seek to fill thousands of public service leadership and high-level support positions, and governing spots on advisory boards, commissions, and other bodies within the federal government. A strong Latino presence in the highest level appointments of President Joe Biden’s Administration is crucial to help ensure that the Administration develops policies and priorities that effectively address the issues facing the Latino community and all Americans. The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund is committed to ensuring that the Biden Administration appoints qualified Latinos to top government positions, including those in the Executive Office of the President, Cabinet-level agencies, sub-Cabinet, and the federal judiciary. This Primer provides information about the top positions available in the Biden Administration and how to secure them through the appointments process. 2021 NALEO | PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS PRIMER 2 2021 NALEO Presidential Appointments Primer TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND 4 AVAILABLE POSITIONS AND COMPENSATION 5 HOW TO APPLY 8 TYPICAL STEPS 10 In the Presidential Appointments Process NECESSARY CREDENTIALS 11 IS IT WORTH IT? 12 Challenges and Opportunities Of Presidential Appointments ADVOCACY & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 13 For Latino Candidates & Nominees 2021 NALEO | PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS PRIMER 3 BACKGROUND During the 1970’s and 1980’s, there were very few Latinos considered for appointments in the federal government.
    [Show full text]
  • Fbi Testimony Trump Using Fake Russian Stories
    Fbi Testimony Trump Using Fake Russian Stories Old-fogeyish and unavowed Selig never graced stately when Noland officiating his converting. Unlit and eristic Lowell mulcts her newsletter kitting while Beck cogitate some boneshakers good-humouredly. Enfeebling Bertrand blear illiterately or superimposing slovenly when Chaim is nonbiological. Trump Top campaign officials Paul Manafort Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr did she reject this offer of election assistance from being hostile foreign. Barnett came several years ago because it had relieved great respect, to you plan; and infiltrate conservative politics or coordinated attempt to raise serious crimes. But using russian story is stories that us a business and uses information used in the middle of the process, the state and. Charles Lane Ben Domenech and Trey Gowdy react to rip three of Senate impeachment trial in 'Special Report'. Mueller's report by no i that somehow Trump campaign for the 2016 US presidential election conspired with free Russian government's. Former fbi using social issues relating to use their findings by trump administration sought to steele dossier generated entirely abroad in a fake clinton to provide more. Russian propaganda over Crimea and the Ukraine: how exact it work? Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the ignorant of PBS viewers and party the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. You can inflate a trek of supported browsers in here Help Center. PM Emin Agalarov calls Trump Jr. FBI's Comey testifies before an Intelligence Committee on. Flynn lied about what nature was his calls with Kislyak. Jake Tapper jaketapper Twitter. But match found no prospect of a conspiracy.
    [Show full text]
  • WILS Connect a Publication of the Women in Law Section of the New York State Bar Association
    2021 | VOL. 2 | NO. 1 WILS Connect A publication of the Women in Law Section of the New York State Bar Association WILS PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE: WOMEN IN LAW: ALWAYS WORKING, REFLECTIONS ON RUTH BADER Q & A with Terri Mazur and GAPPED ATTORNEYS ARE RETURNING GINSBURG Sheryl Galler TO LAWYERING FOR CASH CLE All Access Pass Maximize Your Time and Earn CLE Credits with On-Demand Learning Now Includes Access hundreds of programs Annual Meeting 2021 online and satisfy your MCLE Programs! requirement for one low price. > Gain access to all CLE Online video programs and course materials for one year > New programs added each month $495 for > Monthly billing option NYSBA Members For more information visit NYSBA.ORG/ALLACCESSPASS Online only. Does not include live programs, CD or DVD products. All Access Pass requires member login and cannot be transferred. Annual subscription required. Contents Features WILS Past, Present and Future: Q & A with Terri A. Mazur 7 and Sheryl Galler Linda Redlisky WILS Members Contribute to a First-of-Its- 14 Kind NYSBA Publication: Virtual Lawyering WILS Connect Fa La La La La and the Practice of Law in the COVID-19 Age 2021 | Vol. 2 | No. 1 16 Leona Krasner Regulars Women in Law: Always Working, Gapped Attorneys Are 17 Returning to Lawyering for Cash Message From the Chair Neva D. Strom 3 Terri A. Mazur Sharing a Coffee, Zoom-Style Message From the Editors 18 Leona Krasner Terri A. Mazur and 4 Laura Sulem Celebrating and Remembering Trailblazing Women Message From 19 Monumental Women Unveil Historic Women’s Rights the President Pioneers Monument in Central Park 5 Scott M.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—Senate S5492
    S5492 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 2, 2007 Mr. HARKIN. Yes, I have received a assurances of the chairman and the system. Small ‘‘p’’ politics, the imposition of good many calls as well. And, I have to ranking Republican on the committee. discretionary preferences, policies and prior- ities in the focus of prosecutorial discretion, say that I would be very concerned, as f I know the Senator from Utah is, if generally are proper. Partisans must accept MORNING BUSINESS them, like it or not. They are not the basis anything in the bill we are considering, for replacing attorneys general. S. 1082, would overturn DSHEA, a law Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I The distinction is important. When the we fought side-by-side to see enacted. ask unanimous consent that there now Justice Department that I served in during Mr. ENZI. It might be helpful if I ex- be a period of morning business with the Kennedy administration came to office, plained the provision you are dis- Senators permitted to speak therein ‘‘political’’ priorities changed. The internal cussing, as my office has received for up to 10 minutes each. security division, active and robust during many calls as well and I believe the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without the Eisenhower administration when loyalty callers are not informed about this objection, it is so ordered. was a major concern, was de-emphasized and eventually was deactivated. The organized matter. Subtitle B of title II of S. 1028 f crime and the civil rights sections, small and establishes the Reagan-Udall Founda- DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE quiet in earlier years, grew into major cen- tion for the Food and Drug Administra- ters of departmental work and were the cen- tion.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES of AMERICA, ) ) V
    Case 1:19-cr-00018-ABJ Document 362 Filed 04/16/20 Page 1 of 81 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) Crim. Action No. 19-0018 (ABJ) ) ROGER J. STONE, JR., ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUMOPINION INTRODUCTION On November 15, 2019, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in the case of United States v. Roger J. Stone. It found the defendant guilty of seven crimes: one count of obstructing a Congressional investigation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505; five separate counts of making a false statement to the government in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001; and tampering with a witness, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1). Once the verdict had been returned,the jurors were officially released from the prohibition against discussing the case that had beenin effect during the trial. A week later, one of the jurors published a column in the Washington Post describing his experience. Likejurors everywhere,none of us asked for thisresponsibilitybut each of usacceptedit willingly. We served the propositionthat everyoneisentitled to a fair trial and that everyoneis innocentuntilprovenguilty. * * * The evidence in this case was substantialand almost entirely uncontested. We listened carefully to the testimony of a series of witnesses and carefullyexaminedevery element of every charge and its defense,and we unanimouslyagreedthat each had been provedbeyonda reasonabledoubt. * * * 1 Case 1:19-cr-00018-ABJ Document 362 Filed 04/16/20 Page 2 of 81 I am proud of our democratic institutions; their value was reaffirmed for me because of the process we went through and the respect we accorded it.
    [Show full text]
  • May 8, 2020 the Honorable Michael E. Horowitz Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General
    May 8, 2020 The Honorable Michael E. Horowitz Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Dear Inspector General Horowitz: Like many Americans, we are deeply concerned by the Department’s decision to move to dismiss the criminal case against Michael Flynn, who briefly served as President Trump’s National Security Advisor. Under a generous plea deal with Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Mr. Flynn was allowed to plead guilty to a single charge of making false statements to federal investigators and avoid prosecution for other serious alleged crimes.1 In measuring the impact of the decision to dismiss these charges, it is important to observe the divide between Attorney General William Barr and the career staff at the Department of Justice. Hours before the government moved to dismiss the case, Brandon Van Grack—an experienced prosecutor who had worked the Flynn case from its inception—abruptly withdrew from the matter. On the merits, the government’s argument for dismissing the case appears to be inaccurate, politically biased, and inconsistent with the Department’s own guidelines.2 The government’s brief is signed only by Timothy Shea—the acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, promoted from the Attorney General’s personal staff to his current post earlier this year—and not by a single career prosecutor.3 1 Michael D. Shear and Adam Goldman, Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I. and Will Cooperate with Russia Inquiry, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 1, 2017; see also James V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fbi's Controversial Handling Of
    THE FBI’S CONTROVERSIAL HANDLING OF ORGA- NIZED CRIME INVESTIGATIONS IN BOSTON: THE CASE OF JOSEPH SALVATI HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 3, 2001 Serial No. 107–25 Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house http://www.house.gov/reform U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 76–507 PDF WASHINGTON : 2001 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:05 Jan 22, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 C:\DOCS\76507.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1 COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York HENRY A. WAXMAN, California CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland TOM LANTOS, California CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut MAJOR R. OWENS, New York ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania STEPHEN HORN, California PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii JOHN L. MICA, Florida CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington, MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio BOB BARR, Georgia ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois DAN MILLER, Florida DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois DOUG OSE, California JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts RON LEWIS, Kentucky JIM TURNER, Texas JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia THOMAS H.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biden Administration Must Defend Americans Targeted by the International Criminal Court Steven Groves
    BACKGROUNDER No. 3622 | MAY 17, 2021 MARGARET THATCHER CENTER FOR FREEDOM The Biden Administration Must Defend Americans Targeted by the International Criminal Court Steven Groves he Declaration of Independence cataloged the KEY TAKEAWAYS ways in which King George III infringed upon American liberties. Among King George’s Since its founding, the United States has T offenses listed in the Declaration was “Transporting tried to protect its citizens from legal us beyond the Seas to be tried for pretended Offences.” harassment and persecution by foreign courts. The king claimed the authority to seize American col- onists and force them to stand trial in Great Britain for criminal offenses allegedly committed in America. The Prosecutor of the International Almost 250 years later, another foreign tribunal— Criminal Court has compiled a secret annex listing American citizens to be the International Criminal Court (ICC), located in targeted for prosecution for alleged war The Hague in the Netherlands—is working toward crimes. issuing arrest warrants for American citizens for allegedly abusing detainees in Afghanistan. The court The Biden Administration should stop the is pursuing this course despite the fact that the United ICC from persisting in its misguided pros- States is not a party to the Rome Statute of the Inter- ecution of American citizens that have national Criminal Court and therefore not subject to already been investigated by the U.S. the ICC’s jurisdiction. This paper, in its entirety, can be found at http://report.heritage.org/bg3622 The Heritage Foundation | 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE | Washington, DC 20002 | (202) 546-4400 | heritage.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Possible Misconduct by Department of Justice in Dropping the Prosecution of Gen
    Report on Possible Misconduct by Department of Justice in Dropping the Prosecution of Gen. Michael Flynn Background: The Flynn Case Michael Flynn was the first senior Trump Administration official who pleaded guilty and pledged to cooperate with the Special Counsel investigation into Russian election interference. As the former National Security Advisor to President Trump, his cooperation was viewed as a critical point of vulnerability to President Trump and other Trump campaign officials targeted by the Special Counsel investigation. However, Flynn’s degree of cooperation varied over time. After a federal judge expressed skepticism over Flynn’s conduct and the fulsomeness of his cooperation, Flynn changed course and decided to challenge his prosecution. The judge rejected his claims of prosecutorial misconduct. He then attempted to withdraw his guilty plea. When the judge expressed reluctance to accept his withdrawal, too, the Department of Justice—in an unprecedented move—filed a motion to withdraw Flynn’s prosecution by Special Counsel Mueller. Did officials at the Department of Justice violate the law when they moved to undo the guilty plea entered by Flynn? What possible charges could be investigated? What did Flynn do? Before his tenure in the Trump Administration, Lt. General Michael Flynn held a senior position at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) during the Obama Administration.1 Obama nominated Flynn to become the 18th Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in April 2012.2 During his service, Flynn became the first U.S. officer to be allowed inside the Russia military intelligence (GRU) unit headquarters.3 He later expressed a desire to invite high-ranking GRU officials to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • FBI-LEEDA Insighter Magazine Is a Publication of FBI-LEEDA, Inc., and Is Pub- FBI LIAISON Lished Three Times Each Year by FBI-LEEDA, Inc
    2013 CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTSApril 2013 Issue I IN THIS ISSUE: 2013 Conference Recap, Awards and Photos beginning on page 10 Law Enforcement Training Opportunities page 4 A special thanks to our Conference Sponsor Free Training FBI-LEEDA and LifeLock offer one and two day identity theft summits. The summits are interactive and intensely focused on introducing the newest trends of the complex crime of identity theft. 43 states. Over 3,000 agencies. Over 8,000 attendees. Have you attended? It’s time. Currently booking 2014 classes. Contact Paige Hanson. Manager of Educational Programs. [email protected]. 480-457-2108. Visit www.fbileeda.org for upcoming training locations. LifeLock, the LockMan Logo and “Relentlessly Protecting Your Identity” are trademarks or registered trademarks of LifeLock, Inc. FBI – LEEDA August 2013 Issue II 5 Great Valley Parkway, Suite 125 Malvern, PA 19355 Tel: 877-772-7712 • Fax: 610-644-3193 www.fbileeda.org 2013 Executive Board PRESIDENT Greg Hamilton, Sheriff 1 | FBI-LEEDA Executive Board Travis County Sheriff’s Office P.O. Box 1748, Austin, TX 78767 2 | President’s Message – by President Greg Hamilton Telephone: 512-854-9788 • Facsimile: 512-854-3289 E-mail: [email protected] 3 | The LEEDing Edge – Executive Director’s Report FIRST VICE PRESIDENT FBI – LEEDA Mission Statement Sam Pennica, Director City County Bureau of Identification 4 | Training Opportunities – Course Schedules 3301 Hammond Road, Raleigh, NC 27603 4 Command Institute for Law Enforcement Executives® Telephone: 919-255-7370 • Facsimile: 919-856-6305 4 Supervisor Leadership Institute® Email: [email protected] 5 Supervisory Liability - Online 5 Executive Leadership® SECOND VICE PRESIDENT 5 Leadership and Management Seminar David Boggs, Chief 5 Leaders Without Titles Broken Arrow Police Department 8 Distance Learning Online - Phase II - Advanced Supervisory Liability 2302 S.
    [Show full text]
  • Nontraditional Criminal Prosecutions in Federal Court
    Nontraditional Criminal Prosecutions in Federal Court Jonathan Remy Nash* ABSTRACT Who, besides the U.S. Department of Justice, can prosecute criminal actions in federal court? This Article considers this question, which has arisen recently in various contexts—the DOJ’s attempt to abort the prosecution of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, the contempt prosecution of former Sheriff Joseph Arpaio (who received a presidential pardon), the confrontation over the court-appointed interim U.S. Attorney in New York, and a local District Attorney’s threats to prosecute lawbreaking federal law enforcement officials. Consider first nontraditional, trial-level federal prosecutions. The Constitution’s Take Care and Appointments Clauses, as well as standing doctrine, preclude private prosecutions and prosecutions by states and Houses of Congress. Court-appointed interim U.S. Attorneys may oversee federal prosecutions, and court-appointed special prosecutors may prosecute criminal contempt cases. However, court-appointed attorneys likely cannot undertake broader responsibilities. Consider next criminal appeals. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged the possibility of a state’s appellate standing where the DOJ declines to appeal a federal criminal decision holding a state statute unconstitutional, that precedent is dubious. Moreover, even if a state’s standing is sometimes proper, the case for appellate standing of a House of Congress is weaker. Finally, consider state prosecutions in federal court. A state should have standing to appeal criminal cases to the Supreme Court and to pursue properly removed state criminal prosecutions in the lower federal courts, as should any properly designated state governmental entity. To the extent a * Robert Howell Hall Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Research, Emory University School of Law; Director, Emory University Center for Law and Social Science; Director, Emory Center on Federalism and Intersystemic Governance.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of Investigation Regarding Allegations of Mishandling of Classified Documents by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Septe
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Report of Investigation Regarding Allegations of Mishandling of Classified Documents by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Office of the Inspector General Oversight and Review Division September 2, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1 II. BACKGROUND................................................................................. 2 A. Gonzales’s Professional Background........................................ 2 B. Overview of National Security Information Classification.......... 3 C. Security Facilities Available to Gonzales as Attorney General for the Handling of Classified Materials ................................... 4 1. Justice Department ....................................................... 4 2. Gonzales’s Residences.................................................... 5 D. Security Briefings Received by Gonzales as White House Counsel and as Attorney General ............................................ 7 III. GONZALES’S HANDLING OF CERTAIN CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS... 8 A. Creation and Handling of the Handwritten Notes as White House Counsel .............................................................. 8 B. Gonzales’s Handling of the Handwritten Notes After He Was Sworn In As Attorney General ........................................ 11 C. Gonzales’s Handling of the Notes and Other SCI Documents as Attorney General............................................................... 14 1. OAG practices
    [Show full text]